Glen Johnson vs Kyle Walker

A recent comment stirred my interest.  I'm actually a big fan of Kyle Walker, but I'm not sure if he's more effective than Glen Johnson.  Let's take a look at the stats.

	G. Johnson	K. Walker
apps (sub)	29	26
tackles/pm	2.2	2
interceptions/pm	1.7	2.2
offsides won pm	0.1	0.3
clearances pm	2.4	2.6
dribbled past pm	0.8	1
blocked shots pm	0.3	0.2
aerial duels won pm	1.4	1.8
own goals	1	0
goals	0	1
assists	2	2
chances created	28	31
shots pm	0.7	0.7
passing %	84.1	82.2
passes pm	50.2	53.7
back pass %	45.6	34.9
crosses pm	0.2	0.7
cross %	9.8	20.2
long balls pm (total)	2 (57)	3.8 (100)
long ball %	54.3	60.2
key passes pm (total)	1 (28)	1.2 (31)
successful dribbles pm (total)	1.6 (46)	0.8 (22)
fouls drawn pm (total)	1.3	1.2
dispossessed pm (total)	1.2	1.3
turnovers pm (total)	1.1	0.6
TTI	11.9	12.7

Well, I was wrong.  Walker is more effective and the overall better right back.  He is just as turnover prone as Johnson, but he at least makes it up more on the defensive end.  The stats that stand out most for me are his 34.9 back pass percentage, 20.2 successful cross percentage, and especially his 60.2 long ball success percentage with 100 attempts.  The latter is just ridiculous when you consider he only played in 26 matches.

How is Kyle Walker not in the England side for the WC?  Apparently Phil Jones is second choice and that's just laughable.  Might as well put a cardboard cut-out of a donkey out there, it will do the same as 'El Terminator'.

Was Glen Johnson really that bad against Italy?

There are calls for Johnson to lose his place in the England side due to his 'dismal' performance against Itay at the World Cup, but is it really warranted?  Let's compare him to Leighton Baines, who can step on a puppy and the English press would publish articles about the state of his injured foot.

	Johnson	Baines
chances created	2	2
pass %	90	93
back pass %	36.2	50
tackles	3	2
tackle %	40	33
fouls	1	0
interceptions	0	2
blocked shots	0	0
clearances	0	0
dribbled past	1	1
key passes	2	2
true turnover index	9	4

This is a great example of how my 'true turnover index' can be skewed, especially when it comes to defenders.  Glen Johnson has a higher TTI simply because he had more possession of the ball.  He possessed the ball 15 more times than Baines and England's attack was 15% more from Johnson's side of the pitch.  Of course, that doesn't excuse bad shot selection.

Defensively, Johnson did little if nothing, but he also had less opportunity than Baines.  Italy's attack was more focused on the right side of pitch than the left, 38% to 27%.  He did have more tackles and a higher tackle % though, despite Baines' 2 interceptions.

Where Johnson is clearly better is passing.  Baines had the higher passing percentage, but half of his passes were toward his own goal, which is really not a good thing when you are a left back.  Johnson's 36.2% back pass rating is outstanding to say the least, especially paired with his 90% success rate, but his attacking abilities have never really been questioned.

The bottom line is, if Johnson should be dropped, so should Baines and probably most of the first team for that matter as really only Sturridge put on an outstanding performance.  He never has been and never will be a top class defender, but he is an above average attacking right back.

Pepe Reina or Simon Mignolet?

Since Napoli have admitted they won't be able to pay Pepe Reina to stay, he may be sold to Arsenal at a discount of £5m.  I think most would agree it would be bad business to sell Reina to a competing club like Arsenal, but what if a lesser club like West Brom or even Villa come knocking?  Should Reina be given the chance to be our number 1 again?  Should we try to keep him as a back-up? I don't know about anyone else, but I wasn't exactly blown away by Mignolet last season.  Let's look at the stats, two seasons ago for Reina and last season for Mignolet, league matches only.

	Reina	Mignolet
matches (sub)	31	38
clean sheets	14	10
goals allowed per	1.1	1.32
saves per match	1.35	1.97
saves per goal	1.27	1.7
avg claim success %	89	96
dist. success %	75	69
pass success %	70.8	67.3
aerial duel win %	85.7	83.3
long ball success %	45.8	39

The most important stats here are saves per goal and average claim success percentage, both of which go to Mignolet.  The 7% difference between the two keepers in ACSP is crippling to Reina if he has any aspirations to win his old job back.  It is an indication of what many think of the 31-year-old Spaniard: he takes unnecessary risks and has frequent momentary lapses of reason and concentration.

In his last couple of seasons, Reina appeared to be more interested in trying to create goal scoring opportunities instead of trying to prevent them.  The thing is, he's quite good at contributing to the attack, much more so than Mignolet, but what's the point if you can't do your primary job as a keeper?  I would even argue that Reina had a better defense in front of him than Mignolet does now.

Reina had Jamie Carragher and a healthy Jose Enrique for most of the season.  Though Carra was in his twilight year, he knew his limitations, made few mistakes, and was in command of Liverpool's defense, even when he wasn't on the pitch.  When he was, Carragher rarely went forward as much as Agger, Skrtel, and Sakho tend to.  The thing about Mignolet is that he doesn't take command like a keeper should and if that doesn't change, he should find his way somewhere else soon.

Sterling showed his strengths, but exposed his weaknesses vs Italy

There's no doubting that Raheem Sterling did an outstanding job introducing himself to the world yesterday.  It is nothing new to us Liverpool fans who have followed his progression the past four years.  Unfortunately, what he does worse was just as apparent as what he does well. His defense and ability to hold on to the ball left much to be desired:

chances created	1
back pass %	57.6
errant passes	3
shots	3
shot %	0
dispossessed	2
take ons	4
unsuccessful to	3
turnovers	1
true turnover index	13

He basically did two things good, albeit very good, he set-up England's only goal with a brilliant pass to Rooney and he treated the Italian defenders like orange cones, dribbling pass them at will.  That's all fine and dandy, but most of it was all for nothing.

A back pass % of 57.6 for a winger is abominable.  That means of his 33 pass attempts, 19 of them were toward his own goal and at least one of those fell into Italy's possession going in the direction they so desired.  True turnover index takes in effect whenever a player gives possession over to the other team either by shots that lead to opposition possession, errant pass, dispossession, unsuccessful take on, or offensive foul (including offside).  Sterling had the worst TTI of Englishman on the pitch.  In comparison, Rooney had a TTI of 10, Henderson and Sturridge each had a 9, Gerrard had an 8, and Welbeck had a 7.

As I stated in my last post though, I'd much rather have a player who takes risk, but the results have to prove positive.  Sterling's back pass percentage severely skews his stats and makes it seem that he is not as risky and turnover prone than he actually is.  He is only 19 though and a whole lot of fun to watch: http://vimeo.com/98246489.

Rickie Lambert makes Fabio Borini 'surplus to the cause'

With the addition of Rickie Lambert, Borini's days appear to have become numbered.  Who scored? probably sums it up best.  According to them:

Why not just stamp 'useless' on his forehead and send him packing.  Oh, that's right, we paid  £10.5m for him.  That's not a typo, £10.5m!  Borini is 23 so the 'he's still young' argument is invalid, his 'potential' will need to come to fruition very soon, like next season for whomever he plays for, or he'll fall under the David Bentley category.  If we need a fourth striker, I'd rather see the younger Luis Alberto or Samed Yeşil get a chance.  Unfortunately, we'll be lucky to get half of what was invested in Fabio.

A stat comparison with Rickie Lambert is even more daunting:

	Borini	Lambert
Apps (sub)	25 (7)	31 (6)
goals	7	13
assists	2	10
chances created	26	53
cc per	0.8	1.4
pass %	76.6	69.7
key passes	0.8	1.5
back pass %	52.9	41.4
shots pg	2.1	2.8
shot %	14	16
dispossessed pg	1.5	1.6
turnover pg	1.3	1.4

The significant stats here are assists, chances created, and key passes.  Lambert will most likely see the pitch with either Sturridge or Suarez as the front man, so he'll be most likely asked to be more of a set-up man than a finisher/poacher.  Borini's stats indicate that he lacks the ability to be a consistent second striker and poaching is seemingly the only skill he possesses.

One stat that I think should be more significant though rarely draws any attention is 'back pass %'.  Not to insult anyone's intelligence, but these are passes that go towards one goal and not towards the opposition's.  52.9% is very high and it completely invalidates Borini's superior pass % since it's much easier to pass back than to progress forward.  This probably why Lambert has five times the assists and twice as many chances created.  I'd rather have a player who tries to create goal chances and fails, then one that just gives up and passes the ball back to do it all over again.  It's not as if Lambert was turning the ball over significantly than Borini.

Would anyone take Balotelli over Sturridge right now?

Daniel Sturridge is king right now, the world is at his fingertips, but before January 31, 2011, he was a prisoner, an oppressed striker relegated to the wings and the bench of a Chelsea squad fiercely controlled by a maniacal Italian (that is called 'sarcasm').  Then he was sent out on loan to Bolton, where he scored  8 goals in 12 matches, and seemingly proved his ability up front, even with a lesser supporting cast.  Unfortunately, he got lost in the manager merry-go-round when he returned to Stamford Bridge and was oft-injured the next season-and-a-half.  I guess I should say 'thankfully', since those are the circumstances that led him to Liverpool.

Since joining LFC, he has been pure magic, scoring 31 goals and assisting 10 more in 43 matches (plus 4 goals in 6 cup matches).  He has had one major bout with injury and a few minor ones, which is concerning, but let's just hope that is behind him.  Otherwise, he's been outstanding on and off the field, which the same can't be said of his Italian counterpart.

I just don't understand all the hullabaloo over 'Super' Mario.  There's no denying his talent, but his crap attitude and spotlight antics are not worth the distraction.  I have no problem saying he was the reason City aren't three time champions, his efforts on the field were far less than off.  It's hilarious that he became such a prolific scorer for Milan, at least for the remaining of the 2012-13 season, I'm sure his lack of performance at City during the first half of the season was the Blues' fault and not his.

While I'm convinced Balotelli is more talented than Sturridge, he desperately lacks the maturity, self-respect, and work ethic that the latter displays.  Can you imagine how Balotelli would have reacted to having to play out of position for years (and young, developing years at that) like Sturridge did at Chelsea?  He would have cried and complained until his hair turned whatever color it hasn't been yet.

If there is any indication that he may be maturing and becoming more of a team player, it's the fact that he had 6 assists last season, that's 4 more than he had in any season at City and 3 more than he had his whole time there.  I won't hold my breathe though and with all that said, watch him go out and score a brace today, lead Italy to the finals, and get the most outstanding player of the tournament.  He and Sturridge are certainly both capable.

Gerrard is better than Pirlo

I have all the respect in the world for Andrea Pirlo, he is one of the few Italians that I admire, and that says a lot because I have no love for Gli Azzuri.  (There's too much blatant corruption and disrespect for the game in Italy, a history of rewriting itself for it's own greater good, but this blog is not about Italian football so I'll bite my tongue for now.)

He is not better than Gerrard though.  He does do some things slightly better, but overall, Gerrard is superior.  When I think of Pirlo, I think of George Best's quote about David Beckham: "He cannot kick with his left foot, he cannot head a ball, he cannot tackle and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that he's all right."  Of course, Pirlo can kick with his left foot (though not penalties, right RVP?) and he's more than just all right and certainly preferred over Beckham in almost all facets, except for maybe self-marketing.

                                           Pirlo                   Gerrard
goals (pens)                           4                      13 (10)
assists                                    6                         13
pass %                                88.5                      86
chances created                    68                        67
successful dribble %              71                        71
dispossessed per                  1.2                       0.5
turnovers per                        0.3                       0.5
successful tackles                  43                        98 
tackle per match                   1.4                       2.9
tackle %                               29                        52
interceptions per                   1.3                       1.4
clearances per                      0.5                       2.7
dribbled past                        1.6                       0.6
blocked shots                       0.2                       0.4

As the stats above tell, Pirlo is slightly the better passer, chance creator, and is less error prone, but the Italian Medallion benefits from playing in a league better suited for a pace-challenged, technique-reliant 35-year-old.  It's no secret that Serie A is a slower-paced league, though I would disagree that the Prem is technically inferior (that's a subject for another day).  Also Pirlo makes less errors mostly because he is less involved in matches than Gerrard, Pirlo does very little (at least not well) if anything on the defensive side of the pitch.  One thing that did stand out for me though is Pirlo being dispossessed more per a match than Gerrard, I would figure with Stevie-G's more risque style, he would fall short in this category.

Compared to Gerrard, Pirlo is a defensive liability.  If he wasn't brilliant on the ball, he'd long be out of work. Gerrard doesn't just top Pirlo in nearly every defensive stat, he dwarfs him.  Though Pirlo's age does figure in his ability to contribute defensively as stats show he has become less involved over the years.  Regardless of all this info though, club football and international football (especially World Cup) are two vastly different animals.  So at the very least, Gerrard is better and more valuable at the club level.